Al Wakeelo logo

Al Wakeelo

Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty

Initializing Secure Chambers

1989 PCRLJ 1778

MUMTAZ BIBI vs STATION HOUSE OFFICER and others

Petitioner: MUMTAZ BIBI VS Respondent: STATION HOUSE OFFICER and others

Court: Lahore High Court Decision Date: 1988-12-07

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Muhammad Munir Khan Title: MUMTAZ BIBI vs STATION HOUSE OFFICER and others Case No.: Writ Petition No, 1055 of 1988/BWP Date of Judgment:1988-12-07 Reported As: 1989 P Cr. L J 1778 Result: Abashment declined

Judgment ORDER ' Through this Constitutional petition Mst. Mumtaz Mai wants this Court to quash F.I.R. No, 129/88 under section 10(2) of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 registered at Police Station Channi Goth on her report and to direct S.H.O. Police Station Channi Goth to register case against Shahbaz Khan S.H.O. And 3 others. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that F.I.R. No,129/88 was not lodged by the petitioner against Mahi and others; that the allegations levelled in F.I.R. Against Mahi and others are false and concocted and that Shahbaz Khan and others have registered a false case against Mahi Khan and others. 2. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. I find that the F.I.R No, 129/88 was lodged by the petitioner herself; that the F.I.R. Bears her thumb-impression; that the S.H.O., who is present in the Court, states that the F.I.R. Was recorded as stated by the petitioner and that she had thumb-marked the same in token of its correctness and that the allegations leveled by her in the F.I.R. Have been found correct; that after the registration of the case. Mst. Mumtaz Begum has also been arrested as an accused in this case because she was found to be a consenting party to the Zina committed with her by Mahi and others. It seems to me that since she has been arrested as an accused in the case, therefore, she wants the same to be quashed. I do not desire to pre-empt the functions and duties of the trial Court. 3. For what has been said above, there being no merit, the petition is dismissed in limine.

Related Legal Research & Directories